Illegal ISN'T a noun

Prove me wrong, Sup Forums.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=_61hzuGGJX0
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

You're right, criminal fits better.

sage

Also illegal is a noun

Fuck off, drumpftard. Not EVERY undocumented migrant can be a criminal. BTFO.

No, it's a description. Illegal immigrant.

keking at the casual shilling by google saying it is only used in NA and is derogatory.

It's a short form of illegal immigrant

Undocumented migration is a criminal act. Therefore, undocumented migrants are criminals.

WETBACKS
E
T
B
A
C
K
S

That's basically entrapment

no it's an adjective

The English language is fluid. you can fuck right off with your rules.

Yet

Like breaking into a prison, right? Wait, no, thats not entrapment.

Now Sup Forums is appropriating native american culture. I thought you wanted the pipeline?

...

Why would my post have any effect on whether a sombrerofag goes full wetback?

Also I'd have to be an LEA for entrapment to apply.

Someone tell Trump that "cyber" and "nuclear" aren't nouns

I'm pretty sure English allows adjectives to be nominalized, but it's not like the English language has a recognized body setting standard rules anyway

Illegal is a state of being

I'm pretty sure that no one on Sup Forums drinks mouthwash so there's no cultural appropriation here

Context.

illegal is a spook

OP is right. It is an adjective to the word "alien".

youtube.com/watch?v=_61hzuGGJX0

I am talking about them being criminals for doing something they can't help

I don't care for your emotional word games. They broke the law. And your lot is enabling them to do so. They need deportation - you need citation.

>they can't help entering a country illegally
Mi no hablo stupido, Pablo.

Neither is 'alien'.

Ayy Lmao is the correct noun. It refers to both the species of grey and the sound they make when their examining you and the anal probe backs up with shit.

Spooks are a spook

What would you do if you lived in a country where you were not allowed to have certain liberties or an opportunity to work because the towns were so far away? What if you didn't have a say in government and "democratically" elected representatives had complete control? I bet you feel pretty dumb now.

You are right, it is an adjective.

Poor guys, they just couldn't help selling the bodies of their wives/daughters/sisters to some cartel lowlife to sneak them across the border

must be terrifying to lose control of your body like that and just watch without any control over yourself

it's called a substantive adjective. An adjective used as a noun to mean those which can be described with the adjective.

Compare "the dead" or "the poor" or "Italians" etc

English is as English does.

Then you would fix the problem there, not bring the problem elsewhere.

That shithole they are from is never going to get better if people flee from it.

I don't care. We're full, remember? Furthermore, it doesn't change the fact that they broke the law.

Yes, it is an adjective. Also adjectives in the past have been used to create nouns. For example when I say,"He is an illegal", it is implied that I am calling him an illegal citizen of the United States of America.

Literally everybody who is an illegal immigrant crossed the border illegally and intentionally circumvented the law and border stations to do so. People born on American soil are considered citizens and not illegal. The only people who have crossed the border illegally who 'couldn't help it' would be children and submissive people who were brought along by the person who chose to break the law.

It's just short hand fucking retard

Trapping someone = entrapment. I am pretty sure if you like the border with bear traps or maybe a trap for smaller animals the Latinxs would be entrapped

Fpbp

It's an adjective, you are right. It belongs in front of shitskin or beaner to describe the human trash that is flooding in.

→
→
→
→
→

GET IN HERE!!!!!!!!

>Latinxs
Why is this a thing?

entrapment would imply they are trying to get out
illegals are free to leave by themselves if they don't like being deported

no you

Because not every mexican is hispanic or something, racist

Ching chong I don't speak mongolian

Fpbp.

It's amazing the indignation leftards will throw at you for daring to incist illegal immigrants are criminals

By definition yes they are

fpbp
spsbp

It has. Thing to do with empathizing their positiowe can't just throw out immigration policy and laws because a feel bad for poor people in Central America

fpbp

I am so indignant right now. Why is everyone calling them criminals? Every single person on this board is a criminal for looking at those wikileaks emails.

Actually yes you can

>murderers aren't illegal! there just undocumented hangmen! How dare you separate them from their families!

calling an illegal alien an undocumented citizen is like calling a ghetto corner heroin dealer an unlicensed pharmacist

Because immigration law is, you know, LAW, and people who break laws are, you know, CRIMINIALS?

Yeah, something like that.

Look up entrapment. If police went to Mexico, encouraged people to immigrate illegally, and busted em as soon as they crossed, that'd be entrapment

The term is Illegal Alien because the government takes a lien against the salt in your bloodstream, legally owning your labour, your wealth and your very body.

This is why the Left have tried so very hard to bury the term. It's not special snowflakism, they are apparently hoping lawyers are too lazy to look up the term in their own legal dictionaries.

Being an Illegal Alien is the very worst legal situation to find yourself in.

can you please please include this picture in your next article against us alt-right?

It's an adjective.

Like illegal immigrant.

>You're right, criminal fits better.

Breaking the law isn't what makes a person a criminal.

A person snorting coke in their bathroom is breaking the law, but they're not a criminal because of it.

If law didn't exist and you stole my bike like a nigger, you would still be a criminal.

What dumb people assume, is that all laws are moral all the time.

If a law is immoral, the existence of that law is a crime.

I don't expect a bong to understand with your shitty system of jurisprudence ("look at me, I was accused of a crime and have to prove my innocence :^D").

How do you define a criminal then if not as a person who breaks a law?

it's a slang term for "illegal immigrant"
in that context it is a noun
english is fluid

savage best first post

>If a law is immoral, the existence of that law is a crime.
Then lobby to have it ammended or struck off the books, why not?

My experience of the law is that it is a negotiation. There are no black and whites unless you force the issue, or are tricked into signing something in front of witnesses.

>look at me, I was accused of a crime and have to prove my innocence
You're thinking of the French m8. Under UK Commonwealth Law you are innocent until a barrister convinces a jury of your guilt.

"VICES are those acts by which a man harms himself or his property.

Crimes are those acts by which one man harms the person or property of another.

Vices are simply the errors which a man makes in his search after his own happiness. Unlike crimes, they imply no malice toward others, and no interference with their persons or property.

In vices, the very essence of crime—that is, the design to injure the person or property of another—is wanting.

It is a maxim of the law that there can be no crime without a criminal intent; that is, without the intent to invade the person or property of another. But no one ever practises a vice with any such criminal intent. He practises his vice for his own happiness solely, and not from any malice toward others.

Unless this clear distinction between vices and crimes be made and recognized by the laws, there can be on earth no such thing as individual right, liberty, or property; no such things as the right of one man to the control of his own person and property, and the corresponding and co-equal rights of another man to the control of his own person and property.

For a government to declare a vice to be a crime, and to punish it as such, is an attempt to falsify the very nature of things. It is as absurd as it would be to declare truth to be falsehood, or falsehood truth." --Lysander Spooner

>english is fluid
grammar fluid

>You're thinking of the French m8. Under UK Commonwealth Law you are innocent until a barrister convinces a jury of your guilt.

I knew it was one of you two.

+1 for innocent until proven guilty.

It's an adjective and adjectives describe nouns.

>English 101

by coming in illegally they are harming the economy of the rightful inhabitants through untaxed free gibs
how is that not a crime?

>If a law is immoral, the existence of that law is a crime.
True, but you have to explain how migration laws are immoral then

The immigrant isn't committing a crime.

Receiving stolen property isn't criminal. The person, or persons who stole the property, are guilty.

The person who enforces free gibs is the criminal.

rong

in english, any word can be noun-ed or verb-ed

The best part about you being here and "trolling" us is that'll you'll soon be a "racist bigot nazi" too because our arguments are logically flawless and irrefutable. We just got the host of The Apprentice elected president of the United States, it's hilarious that you actually think we'll be outwitted by someone as dimwitted as you.

You really fucked up coming here, you're just too stupid to realize it right now.

So enjoy your stay, dummy. You're ours now.

>True, but you have to explain how migration laws are immoral then

Because they violate property rights and our right to freely travel.

If I bring an undocumented Mexican into the US to live in my home in Ohio, someone from New York has zero say in the interaction between the Mexican and myself.

My neighbor has zero say in the matter. Both myself and the Mexican have autonomy, and our actions are harming no one.

Free gibs, as the pizza pointed out, is a crime, but it is the people enforcing it who are the criminals.

>NA derogatory....

Wtf fuck off google kike pieces of shit. "No human is illegal!" Yeah except the ones that ILLEGALLY enter the country. Making them ILLEGAL ALIENS.

A noun is defined as a word that can be used as the subject or object of a verb. Using "illegal(s)" as a noun is perfectly fine, and so is other similar words, like for example "untouchable(s)". BTFO

>You're ours now.

I totally understand what you're saying I've always been yours in my heart.

Humans are quite dynamic.

Logically, I'm libertarian because the philosophy *is* logically valid.

Emotionally I'm a monarchist.

I wrestle with myself all the time, and neither Sup Forums nor my affinity for Triarii help matters much.

You have my heart, lad, but classical liberalism will always have my mind.

that NY guy has a say in the matter because it's also his money that funds your beaner friend's welfare
do you really think countries have immigration laws simply because they are evil?

>that NY guy has a say in the matter because it's also his money that funds your beaner friend's welfare

Fair enough.

And if we abolished welfare?

>do you really think countries have immigration laws simply because they are evil?

No, "the road to hell is paved with noble intentions."

It's an abbreviation of "illegal alien".

But it is better to say the whole thing. People insert self-satisfying things into expressions like that. They hear you say, "illegal", they make it "illegal immigrant" and then just "[racist pejorative] immigrant" in their heads.

It's better to say "illegal alien" every time.

Except that such is not every single case. Illegals work and don't pay taxes, depending on where they live receive a variety of social benefits; and clog up the job market.
>Liberalism
>Rational
The fact is, thinking rationally, it is what humanity leaves behind what matters. You can't overtly focus on the individual's freedoms if you disregard the fact that the only worth of a human at the moment of death is their achievements, and a macro-scale, what they contribute to humanity.
Nationalism is the only logical philosophy, because it exults both the citizen's duty to the nation and the nation's duty to work in favor of the citizen first and foremost.

Who the fuck cares what some dead guy says? He's not the Supreme Court and his word doesn't trump us law.

the law is that if you want to immigrate, you need to be vetted and cleared to make sure you aren't a threat to the rightful citizens of this nation.

Go live in the country founded by that guy if you like what he says so much.

>And if we abolished welfare?
He would still benefit from utilities, infrastructure and other things provided by the state even though he is not entitled to them by virtue of not being legally part of the state

ill use criminal instead, how about that

>classical liberalism will always have my mind.

Top, Kek. Yeah you just keep believing that.

You'll be Sup Forumss soon enough.

>And what if we abolished welfare?
you still have an undocumented immigrant who might as well be a cartel criminal and can't contribute to society in ay meaningful way besides providing cheap labor
immigration laws were made exactly for the state to acnowledge foreign citizens as their own by adding them in a state registry, of course they don't want any criminal scum in

>ignorance of the law is not an excuse to break it

Now that I've had a moment to think about it I would actually like to see what would happen in a war between Brazilian gangs and cartels in Mexico. I mean if Mexico is dissolving border sovereignty what's to stop the crud from moving up?

/threadarino

>no it's an adjective

this

Lol

In English an adjective or verb can become a noun

...

then you go through the process to leave that country legally

MUH GENDERED WORDS
MUH PATRIARCHY